Cruise Ship Lifeboat Tour. What Life Saving Equipment Is Inside? How Much Food & Water?

[ontheweb]

I hope you all realize that a call to the muster stations does not mean you will definitely end up in the lifeboats. That is a last resort.

[Mum2Mercury]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

I hope you all realize that a call to the muster stations does not mean you will definitely end up in the lifeboats. That is a last resort.

True.  A friend of mine told me she was called to her muster station TWICE on one cruise ... never got into a lifeboat.  

 

First time:  Fire onboard, which the crew extinguished.  But the captain was right to pull passengers out /have them in position to board lifeboats, if it had become necessary. 

Second time:  A passenger was missing /believed overboard -- her family was terrified, and they'd made multiple announcements asking her to report to guest services.  The captain never intended to put people into lifeboats, but he badly needed to count every soul onboard.  They found the missing woman, who had been, um, sleeping in the wrong cabin.  

[chengkp75]

8 hours ago, Mum2Mercury said:

The captain never intended to put people into lifeboats, but he badly needed to count every soul onboard. 

This is the primary purpose of the passenger muster:  accountability.  It has everything to do with getting the passengers into known, controllable locations where they can all be accounted for, it really has little to do with getting into lifeboats, other than the number of people assigned to each muster station.

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

This is the primary purpose of the passenger muster:  accountability.  It has everything to do with getting the passengers into known, controllable locations where they can all be accounted for, it really has little to do with getting into lifeboats, other than the number of people assigned to each muster station.

In other words, a call to muster is not yet a time for passengers to panic; the chance of having to abandon ship is still quite low.

[sparks1093]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

This is the primary purpose of the passenger muster:  accountability.  It has everything to do with getting the passengers into known, controllable locations where they can all be accounted for, it really has little to do with getting into lifeboats, other than the number of people assigned to each muster station.

Even in the US Navy mustering the ship is done to ensure everyone is accounted for, primarily for a man overboard. 

[sparks1093]

34 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

In other words, a call to muster is not yet a time for passengers to panic; the chance of having to abandon ship is still quite low.

Most excellent point to keep in mind.

[chengkp75]

7 hours ago, Ilovesailaway said:

I honestly don't put a ton of faith in the ships crew and officers in an extreme emergency. Sorry to say but being a sailor doesn't mean you are wired to put your own life at risk to save others. Just because you have trained and practiced doesn't mean you will act when the bullets start flying.

I love to cruise but I know being at sea has inherent risk. I believe the risk is low enough for the reward I get.

 

3 hours ago, MBP&O2/O said:

I take it you are not being serious? If so then would you apply the same criteria to any emergency service worker.?

Personally  having been there, seen it, done it and worn the tee-shirt, I find the comment insulting.

IMHO of  course.

Any first responder organization or training facility will tell you the same.  So, I guess you don't put much faith in airline pilots, firefighters, police, or even armed forces.  What those same organizations will tell you, is that the more you train, and the more realistic the training, the more "muscle memory" will take over from conscious thought and you will respond as you have trained.  Will the crew act perfectly in an emergency?  Likely not, but they will do a far better job of saving your life than you or all the thousands of passengers would.  I, too, find your attitude, or at least your statement, to be demeaning to those who take training for the sole reason to save your life.  Training is difficult, and many times dangerous to the crew.

[rkacruiser]

9 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

What those same organizations will tell you, is that the more you train, and the more realistic the training, the more "muscle memory" will take over from conscious thought and you will respond as you have trained.  

 

A very recent example in my community of what you are saying.  This week, we had a "runway excursion" at DAY when a CRJ200 slipped off the runway during landing and a wing hit a runway directional sign and a light, damaging the wing.  No one was injured and the passengers had high praise for a flight crew that was very professional and calm during the emergency.  

[rkacruiser]

17 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

A very recent example in my community of what you are saying.  This week, we had a "runway excursion" at DAY when a CRJ200 slipped off the runway during landing and a wing hit a runway directional sign and a light, damaging the wing.  No one was injured and the passengers had high praise for a flight crew that was very professional and calm during the emergency.  

 

And, I should have added, praise for the airport's emergency personnel and the surrounding communities fire/rescue personnel who responded to the incident.  

[Capt_BJ]

it was asked when was the last time people were told to take to the boats .....

 

 

well we'll skip Costa Con' and the one in Greece and go back to 1998 ......

 

when Monarch of the Seas hit the reef not far from St Martin and made a BIG hole.  The Captain called for all help possible and began to lower the boats as he turned to shore and ran the ship aground before it could sink . . . https://professionalmariner.com/crew-of-cruise-ship-that-hit-reef-faulted-for-failing-to-update-charts/

 

"

Twelve minutes after impact, the master sounded the general emergency signal — seven short blasts followed by one prolonged blast — informing passengers of the contact with the reef. He requested that they get dressed, don life jackets and report to their muster stations to prepare to abandon ship. 

Damage-control teams, including specialists in fire, flooding and medical care, were dispersed throughout the ship by 0155, at which point the captain had already turned the vessel around with the intention of beaching the vessel on a sandbar at Great Bay, outside Philipsburg. He continued to inform the passengers of the situation and, after slowing the ship for a soft approach to the beach, ordered the stern anchor deployed at 0221. At 0233, the starboard anchor was dropped, and at 0235 the vessel grounded on a sandbar at Great Bay at a speed of 5 knots. Although damage-control teams had readied the ship’s lifeboats for launch, by 0515 all 2,557 passengers had been evacuated safely by vessels dispatched from St. Maarten.

[Capt_BJ]

This is the primary purpose of the passenger muster:  accountability.  

 

halleluiah ... someone gets it 

 

and this is something that annoys me with the new post covid procedures.  The primary reason for the 'abandon ship drill' prior to your cruse was validating the muster list. If something bad happens you WANT the crew to have a very accurate muster list so they can determine you are missing or not. people knowing where to go and check in during an emergency is an important part of this process.

 

SOLAS has decided the new procedure covers the bases ...... 

 

 Don't mind my opinion .. I was only in the rescue at sea business for 30 years or so . . 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Capt_BJ

[ldubs]

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

 

And I feel that SOLAS is wrong.  Not only does it remove an actual muster experience from the passengers, it removes all crowd management training from the crew.  I dread the day this new muster procedure is put to the test in an actual emergency.  I am hoping that this is reversed once Covid enters the endemic stage.

 

I have zero experience with ship safety protocols, but do have fire service experience.  I could not agree more with your statement.   The change goes way too far in the wrong direction, IMO.  

[ontheweb]

9 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

 

These two examples show why I feel that US flag crews are better than the international crews.  Don't get me wrong, I've worked with some very good international crews, that showed a high level of professionalism, but also with some that lacked this.  The USCG requires that every crew member on a US flag cruise ship have a 40 hour shoreside Basic Safety Training course which includes firefighting and lifeboat skills.  Only deck and engine mariners on foreign flag ships are required to have this, all hotel personnel only get onboard training, which in and of itself is limited in scope (the BST includes actually donning firefighting gear and fighting an actual fire in an enclosed space, so the mariners actually face a fire before it is an emergency).  US flag cruise ships have more certified lifeboatmen (requires another 40 hour shoreside class that covers just lifeboat training) than foreign flag ships do, so the crew is better trained in this function as well.

And I feel that SOLAS is wrong.  Not only does it remove an actual muster experience from the passengers, it removes all crowd management training from the crew.  I dread the day this new muster procedure is put to the test in an actual emergency.  I am hoping that this is reversed once Covid enters the endemic stage.

I understand what you are saying about the new muster experience and also worry about the lack of real training, but I do not think the old procedures will be reinstated. Passengers are almost unanimously in favor of the new procedures. I think unfortunately the only way the old way is restored is if there is a disaster and you are proven right.

[chengkp75]

14 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Passengers are almost unanimously in favor of the new procedures.

Fortunately, passengers don't vote for SOLAS amendments.  And the agencies that do, are not particularly swayed by public opinion.  And, most of those agencies are not from countries with large cruise passenger populations.

Edited October 8, 2022 by chengkp75

[ldubs]

I've read comments in past threads where folk with mobility issues thought someone would come to their cabin to personally escort them to the life boat.  In an abandon ship emergency, I question that this would be practical.  Admittedly that is just a guess on my part.   If correct, another reason all passengers should be made to fully understand the general emergency alert and muster.  

[chengkp75]

3 minutes ago, ldubs said:

I've read comments in past threads where folk with mobility issues thought someone would come to their cabin to personally escort them to the life boat.  In an abandon ship emergency, I question that this would be practical.  Admittedly that is just a guess on my part.   If correct, another reason all passengers should be made to fully understand the general emergency alert and muster.  

There is typically a mobility challenged muster station, that will have a nurse in attendance, and crew assigned to get the disabled to the boats.  There will typically also be crew assigned to go find the disabled (if they are known to the ship), and bring them to the muster, using a hand carry if needed for stairs, or using the elevators (which are not "disabled" as most think, but placed in "firefighter mode" which disables the call buttons at each deck, and the elevator is controlled only in the cab.

[ldubs]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

There is typically a mobility challenged muster station, that will have a nurse in attendance, and crew assigned to get the disabled to the boats.  There will typically also be crew assigned to go find the disabled (if they are known to the ship), and bring them to the muster, using a hand carry if needed for stairs, or using the elevators (which are not "disabled" as most think, but placed in "firefighter mode" which disables the call buttons at each deck, and the elevator is controlled only in the cab.

 

Thanks for the info.  While I am not considered disabled, I am very happy to hear this SOP.  

[Mum2Mercury]

21 hours ago, Ilovesailaway said:

I honestly don't put a ton of faith in the ships crew and officers in an extreme emergency.

 

If I didn't trust the crew and officers, I couldn't sail.  

 

Having said that, I could imagine things "breaking down" toward the end of a real emergency -- as the fire or sinking came nearer and nearer, and as the passengers who remain onboard are the ones who aren't cooperating.  That's why I'd want to reach the lifeboats first -- while things are still more orderly and calm.  

1 hour ago, Capt_BJ said:

it was asked when was the last time people were told to take to the boats .....

So 24 years ago.  Almost half my life ago.  This is a reason to feel very good about the cruise industry's safety record.  How many thousands (millions?) of ships have sailed without a need to put passengers into lifeboats.  

 

The idea of getting into one of those packed-in-three-high boats is terrifying.  The idea of such a boat capsizing and being caught underneath other passengers while water comes in is beyond terrifying.

1 hour ago, Capt_BJ said:

This is the primary purpose of the passenger muster:  accountability ... 

 

Don't mind my opinion .. I was only in the rescue at sea business for 30 years or so . . 

I totally "got it" from the beginning -- we're just talking about how things work in the most extreme situations.  I've enjoyed learning from you.

1 hour ago, ldubs said:

Here is a quote following the sinking of the Oceanos cruise ship where the hero entertainers on board saved hundreds of passengers:

Good story!  Makes me think about something my father-in-law said about his time in Vietnam:  he couldn't predict which of his new soldiers would be any good.  Sometimes the big, strong guys were no good once bullets started flying.  

40 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Fortunately, passengers don't vote for SOLAS amendments.  And the agencies that do, are not particularly swayed by public opinion.  And, most of those agencies are not from countries with large cruise passenger populations.

Ah, but passengers do vote -- they vote with their dollars, and they vote with their survey at the end of the cruise.  And passengers, by and large, love the new, streamlined muster system.

[rkacruiser]

25 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

There is typically a mobility challenged muster station, that will have a nurse in attendance, and crew assigned to get the disabled to the boats.  There will typically also be crew assigned to go find the disabled (if they are known to the ship), and bring them to the muster, using a hand carry if needed for stairs, or using the elevators (which are not "disabled" as most think, but placed in "firefighter mode" which disables the call buttons at each deck, and the elevator is controlled only in the cab.

 

That has been my long standing understanding.

 

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

I think unfortunately the only way the old way is restored is if there is a disaster and you are proven right.

 

I think that you are correct.  

 

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

I dread the day this new muster procedure is put to the test in an actual emergency.  I am hoping that this is reversed once Covid enters the endemic stage.

 

One of Newton's Laws of Motion--Inertia--is active at this time.  

'If what we are doing and our guests like this new procedure, why not continue?'  Why would that not be the mind suit of a cruise line executive in charge of such produces?  

[chengkp75]

12 minutes ago, Mum2Mercury said:

Having said that, I could imagine things "breaking down" toward the end of a real emergency -- as the fire or sinking came nearer and nearer, and as the passengers who remain onboard are the ones who aren't cooperating.  That's why I'd want to reach the lifeboats first -- while things are still more orderly and calm.  

But, getting to your muster station (which you should go to rather than your lifeboat) early does not guarantee that your boat will be loaded and launched first.

12 minutes ago, Mum2Mercury said:

Ah, but passengers do vote -- they vote with their dollars, and they vote with their survey at the end of the cruise.  And passengers, by and large, love the new, streamlined muster system.

That would be important if the cruise lines set the requirements.  But they don't, and they don't have a vote in the IMO, which does set the requirements, either.  Do you think that if the cruise lines had a voice in the safety regulations, that they would have progressed from the Titanic?  Safety equipment and compliance costs money.

 

17 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

One of Newton's Laws of Motion--Inertia--is active at this time.  

'If what we are doing and our guests like this new procedure, why not continue?'  Why would that not be the mind suit of a cruise line executive in charge of such produces?  

Fortunately, as noted above, the cruise line has no vote in the matter.  If the IMO says that ships have to revert to the previous muster system, the cruise lines have to comply, whether their passengers like it or not.

[ldubs]

1 hour ago, Mum2Mercury said:

 

So 24 years ago.  Almost half my life ago.  This is a reason to feel very good about the cruise industry's safety record.  How many thousands (millions?) of ships have sailed without a need to put passengers into lifeboats.  

 

 

 

I agree.  A supplemental question might be for those rare times when lifeboats were needed, how well was it handled.   

[ontheweb]

11 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Fortunately, passengers don't vote for SOLAS amendments.  And the agencies that do, are not particularly swayed by public opinion.  And, most of those agencies are not from countries with large cruise passenger populations.

I still think there would have to be a disaster for there to be a change. Didn't the Costa Concordia incident precipitate the changes made to tighten up the muster requirements? Those should have been in effect prior to that as they were quite sensible, but it took a royal screwup and the disaster that followed to get SOLAS to change the regulations.

[chengkp75]

I'm afraid you're right, but my hope is that there are enough calls to muster with the emergency handled quickly and things returned to normal, but with chaos during the musters to bring about a return.

[MBP&O2/O]

Having been involved with training and exercises at sea, I sort of got sucked in to emergency and contingency planning when I came ashore.
We covered all sorts of interagency scenarios but the guarantee of a fluster cluck was poor communications.
The reason I mention this?
Not so long ago there was bump in Venice and one of the 'experts' said that there were six different nationalities on the bridge,  all using English as a common language ... and all with their own accent. So SO easy for a breakdown and a subsequent  misunderstanding.
As commands move down the food chain something will invariably get mistranslated?

[Capt_BJ]

looking back at these posts suggests a comment or two ....

 

the terms/names IMO and SOLAS are tossed about freely and I doubt many understand who/what they are ...... touted as 'rules' in these discussions they AIN'T in many cases ......

 

IMO: The International Maritime Organization is a specialized agency of the United Nations which is responsible for measures to improve the safety and security of international shipping and to prevent pollution from ships.  As well know the United Nations does NOT make laws and as an 'enforcement agency' ...... well 'nuf said.

 

SOLAS: SOLAS is a TREATY ,,, agreed to by more than 160 countries, that sets minimum standards for: construction, fire protection, life saving equipment, communications equipment, navigation standards and management. But is is a TREATY ..... countries agree to comply but who checks?????

 

What's my point? Not everyone 'enforces' these presumed rules. It is a responsibility of the flag state (the flag the ship sails under) but how many ACTUALLY check? A BUNCH of cruise ships are flagged Bahamas ... wanna guess how many inspectors they have? What authority?

 

In the US much of the SOLAS requirements have been written into the US Code (law) and this is what USCG enforces when they inspect a vessel. I say 'much' because (IME) there are places where the US has STRICTER rules than SOLAS. In general if a vessel wants to load passengers at a US port it MUST pass a USCG inspection of all these SOLAS - as encoded - standards. USCG jurisdiction on this point is IN the US .... and/or on US flag vessels.

 

On the other hand I know of a cruise line that's been around for a LONG time (I sailed 'em 20 years ago and they are still running) who no longer makes any US port calls 'cuz their ships will pass SOLAS but NOT the US 'enhancements' to SOLAS recommendations, as written into US Code and enforced by USCG . . .

 

just sayin'